oh and nice job slowing the cars down Max :lol:

My big worry for Brawn is that they're doing something the FIA will consider illegal that the other teams aren't trying.

brawn himself is known to push the limits

maybe brawn GP isnt carrying enough ballast??

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...13090301.shtml

Most wins will take the championship this year.

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/...-championship/

Dumb.

Maybe it's my love of endurance sports car racing, but IMO it's way more impressive to finish on the podium all season long than to have 5 wins and 12 DNFs and be the champion.

But at least this bodes well for Massa's win it or bin it driving style. :lol:

Anybody know if second event engines actually failed more last year than first event engines? I wonder if taking the penalty and getting off sequence early might have a benefit?

Actually, I believe they changed those rules for this year. You get 8 engines for all 17 races this year, and you can blow up the first 7 and run the next 10 races on the same motor (in theory) without penalty.

I think this is awesome news. Drivers will be going for the win now, instead of just being happy finishing with points.

So what you're saying is... be alone in 3rd so when the first two cars wreck each other out with dumb passing attempts late in the race, you get the win?

Forced passes in open wheel cars rarely end well. I expect plenty of shenanigans. Which wouldn't be a huge deal except you know the FIA will penalize the drivers inconsistantly all season long for risky driving. Oh look Hamilton gets a 10 grid spot penalty, but Massa gets off scot-free, but Vettel gets docked 25 seconds, but Kubica loses 2 championship points... etc. :unamused:

I have to agree with Scott. Season championships should not be primarily based on victories. Consistency over time with maybe a small bonus for wins is far better IMHO.

They could have just made wins worth 12 or 14 points instead of 10 and left the rest of the points schedule alone for the same effect w/o tipping the advantage to the driver who's willing to risk crashing out someone else on the last lap looking for a win.

That was one of the proposals. 12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1 or something if I recall correctly.

They rarely end well for the drivers. But they usually end fantastically for the spectators! :P

And now for 2010, optional budget caps!

http://www.crash.net/formula+one/new...from_2010.html

Important points bolded.

Right...

What's the point of that? To keep the small guys in the hunt?

This reeks of SCCA street-tire factor. The FIA's gonna have to constantly manipulate the rules so the cheaper teams' cars are competitive w/ the spendy teams' cars. Which will negate the spendy teams from bothering to develop any cutting edge technology, and turns F1 into a spec-car series, which none of the big manufacturers and sponsors are going to care about competing in.

I think FIA's taking pages out of NASCAR's playbook too often. Spec cars and spending caps are terrible ideas when the series is pretty much all about advanced technology.

I don't know about the advanced technology argument anymore with standard ECUs, no ABS, no traction control, no launch control, aero limitations, legacy fuel and engines with little practical application.

I am not saying they are not innovating, just that they are not the leaders they used to be. In some ways, ALMS and similar series are doing more in that area.

F1 has to decide what they are. To be the premier series, you have to let builders build premier technology, not just engineer solutions to the nth degree of stifling regulations.

To that end, here's what F1 should really do:

1) Mandatory spending limit at say, 100M euros per season.

2) Fixed fuel load per race weekend. You get X liters of fuel to drive Y miles. It doesn't have to be in the car the whole time, so you can refuel, but you only have so much for the whole race distance. The fuel type is open, but based on energy density, everyone starts the weekend with the same amount of potential energy.

3) Raise the min weight of the cars to 800kg. Heavier cars mean less need for exotic materials (thus allowing more creative design w/o running into the spending cap) as well as results in drivetrain technology more directly applicable to real world cars.

4) Car design rules: single seater, open cockpit, no fenders, one allowable primary aerodynamic device on the front of the car, one primary aerodynamic device on the rear of the car. All engine/tranny layouts and types are allowed, active aero is allowed, active suspension is allowed, driver aides are allowed... basically anything goes, the limiting factor is keeping design/manufacturing cost under the spending cap and being able to finish the race on the allocated fuel.

5) Unlimited testing, but testing costs apply to the spending cap.

6) Long weekend schedules: give the fans lots of time to see the cars... 4 hours testing on Friday, 2 hours of practice on Saturday, 2 hours of Qualifying on Saturday, 2 hours of racing on Sunday.

7) Bring back the practice cars and Friday drivers... if we're giving teams more track time, let's have more cars out there to make the time useful to the teams as *free* track time that they don't have to pay for under the cap.

8 ) Once car per race, per driver, one backup testing car. So three cars go to every race per team. You crash a car, blow a motor, etc during the weekend and can't fix it, that's a DNF/DNS. No spare motor swaps, no tranny swaps, etc... but also, no 10 point penalty for switching a motor the next race, and no artificial limits that span multiple races. Three cars for the weekend, with two of them starting the race... (which does imply the T car can be cannibalized for parts if one of the primary cars breaks).

The bottom line is, I would love to see some high tech cars with all sorts of variation out there. Put a turbo flat 4 diesel up against a E85 V6 with a flywheel based KERS up against a jet-turbine that has a fully electric AWD drivetrain. Let see some crazy active aero that means the following car can make downforce while in the slipstream, then attempt to clean up as they try for the pass, only to be blocked because the lead car goes from their 400hp economy engine map to their 1200hp power engine map to keep from getting passed, only to run out of their fuel allocation with 2 laps to go.

Instead of clamping down more and more on the tech rules, just limit everything by forcing the teams to be efficient, both in their fuel consumption and in their spending. Then, when the cars start to get "too fast", just dial back the fuel allocation by 10%, and the teams will instantly be 10% slower until they can build something 10% more efficient. If the economy means teams will go out of business due to spending so much to stay competitive, then the FIA can just dial back the spending cap.

It's a hell of a lot better than crap like spec ECUs, or spec undertrays, etc, and it gets F1 back to being the premier showcase for technical innovation.

I'm right there with you...

What is funny is that I had 2 sentences about a series with an energy (erg, BTU, calorie...) budget and a $ budget and not much else but wasn't sure that should be F1 and deleted it from my lat post.

I'd like to see the energy or both budgets drop each year by some percent.

Not sure about restricting aero at either end, or fenders. Tires in open air is so 1950s. :)


800KG is OK, but 900KG or 1 ton might be even better for a minimum.

I'd be tempted to make the rule that Aero is open, but you can't replace it if it fails or gets damaged. This also deters some of the the delicate exotic materials and things hanging off the ends of cars out in harms way.

Heck, I might even support "bumpers" from 6-10" off the ground. Not trying to turn them into stock cars, but I am a bit sick of all the shrapnel strewn all over the course on any contact.

New graphics and data coming to the TV coverage this year:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73763
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/73568

Engage drama mode!

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/...ot-be-changed/

She' already at 110% Cap'n! She can't give any more drama!

"But you said it was okay!?!"

http://www.crash.net/formula+one/new...ts_change.html

http://www.f1technical.net/news/11905

Brawn GP gets its first major sponsor... with the Virgin Group (which was rumored to be interested in the ex-Honda team too).

BBC has this awesome circuit map thing up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/moto...efault.stm#top

That's nifty.

thats cool

I cant believe its a race weekend!!

I'm totally fired up! I watched practice live last night... I find it hilarious that the new rules are supposed to give the cars 1/2 the downforce over last season... but because the F1 engineers are so good, this year's car has 17% more downforce than last year, so that plus the slick tires makes them more than 0.5s faster around Albert Park. :lol:

And then there's the whole rear diffuser debacle... I get the feeling that the 3 teams w/ the "illegal" diffusers are going to dominate the race, then get DQ'd a day or two before Malaysia after some BS appeals crap. :rolleyes:

I just watched practice...I'm starting to think these cars will race really well. I am puzzled as to how the three D:fuser teams managed to put one over on everyone else...I know the engineers for those squads were not involved in the initial design, but you think everyone else would have reacted by now. Should be a most interesting race.

Yeah, you would have thought all the big teams would have brought both diffusers... but then again, even w/ the better diffuser they may have been slower, in which case, the appeal of the rule is their best chance, and you can't exactly appeal the rule if you've got the diffuser on your own car. :lol:

Also... nice picks Matt... we picked the exact same lineup! With a minute before the deadline, I almost swapped ALO out for NAK, but decided I should keep the more experienced driver even if he's in a slower car.

Wow!

So, are any of the teams actually using KERS? They talked about it, but I didn't here them say which if any teams are actually using it... Did I miss something?

I found one site saying it was Ferrari's, McLaren, Renault and one BMW, Heidfeld's...

They are talking about the weight factor, but aren't all the cars running the minimum weight with ballast positioned as needed?

They occasionally showed the graphic for using KERS. It was the battery graphic on the RPM graphic. It showed the charge and flashed yellow when it was being used. I think Brawn and Renault were using it as well, but I'm not quite sure.

What's interesting, is that it seems most drivers were using the KERS to help come off corners to long straights. I don't think they showed any driver using it to pass.

Regardless, they were saying that the KERS is heavy, but it also puts the weight at a very specific spot (by the engine). Ballast, on the other hand, can be put anywhere in the car to maximize weight balance.

Should have waited until I saw more of the race. They just explained the new graphic for it... And discussed the weight location, etc...

edited for spoiling

That was quite an opener!

Without spoiling too much, I'm impressed with Brawns debut as well as Hamilton's driving.

What are everyone's thoughts on KERS? Personally, I don't see it lasting more than a season. It really does take away from the essence of F1 although it is a neat strategic weapon.

Ugh... once again F1 gets bitten by not having well defined penalties and procedures and qualified event stewards that are all on the same page with implementing them.

Trulli got shafted.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...30160152.shtml

OMG... [RANT]

I do not claim to understand the FIA or how they run events, but they need to get their $%^& together!

Changing results after the podium ceremony for anything other than a post race inspection failure just makes them look like morons.

There has to be consistency! If that means having a standard set of stewards that go officiate every race, so be it. Maybe they have that, but it doesn't appear that way.

It is the officials responsibility to reset the order before restarting or concluding a race. If there was something still to be resolved after the checker, bring all cars to the pit lane until it is resolved and then roll the podium cars to "victory lane". Passing under a local yellow is one thing, a safety issue, and the driver's responsibility. Determining positions/running order behind the Safety Car is the Race officials! You can't penalize a driver for being in the wrong position unless he has refused to comply with your direction as to where he should be IMHO.

Back to a general rant at the FIA, they need to get control of "The World Feed". The production quality is all over the place depending on the race. I don't know how to fix it, but it needs to be taken care of. Australia was not bad, but it was not great either. I realize the speed guys can only talk about what the world feed has provided and don't blame them, but the feed itself is sad. Their ability to cover incidents or significant events and/or replay them in a timely manner is pitiful at times.[/rant]

Otherwise, it was a pretty interesting race. I wish I could get interested enough to participate in the Fantasy "team", but stuff like this just annoys me.

The mandatory two different tire rule still boggles my mind as well...

All the stuff like the two tire rule, the addition of KERS, the moveable front wing, etc are all attempts to make the cars go different speeds at different times in their race strategy.

So even if everyone is still finishing the race distance in the same overall time, some teams will be faster than others on track because they opted for the soft tires in the 1st stint rather than the 3rd, or one driver that uses KERS for passing vs. one that uses it only on the longest straight, vs. one car w/o KERS at all that's faster in all the corners because they've got better weight distribution.

It's sort of a silly way to manufacture on-track speed disparity (and therefor passing, even if it's not "real" passing), but it did seem to result in make the race more interesting than the time trial parade it was in the Michael Shumacher era. It's especially silly, when the last two seasons have been fantastic without all these changes... hell, last season's championship came down to a pass in the last corner of the last race of the season!

But it's all especially ridiculous when after the race, they just go and move the standings around anyway. Jackie Stewart is dead on when he rants and raves about the league needing a fixed stewarding crew that stewards every event... and it needs to be made up of an FIA rep, a couple of ex-drivers, and a local track rep. The ex-drivers are the guys that know how to dole out fair punishment for incidents because they've all been there... they can tell who was at fault, and they can tell immediately. This post race time penalty BS ruins the credibility of the sport.

Here is the video that F1 pulled... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgIk-RjiI7w
Trulli clearly way out in the grass.

It is still the stewards fault for not resolving this before the podium. Where is the in-car video? Don't all the cars have video? Why should they have to rely on what driver's say? They just look incompetent.

Let me guess, the world feed can't afford enough hard disk space to store all the camera footage and TIVO just what they broadcast in real time... :rolleyes: No wonder it takes them 5 minutes to replay incidents at turn 1 on the opening lap, they are looking for the remote.

I am not going to judge what Hamilton did or did not say when. The visual record should be the determining factor.

Interesting how my two gripes come together.

Now the FIA is saying that further action may be taken against Hamilton, which of course has the more sensational rumormills (like crash.net) saying that he's likely to be excluded from the championship this year.

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...02145024.shtml
http://www.crash.net/formula+one/new...exclusion.html

Now, that's a bit far I think. Even if they feel he lied, this penalty should be enough and a stern warning not to do it again, or risk losing all points for the season.

What a joke.

First, the driver's testimony shouldn't have jack shit to do with the stewards'/FIA's decisions. They expect the teams to say things that would lose them championship points? I know I wouldn't trust their testimony anymore than I could throw an MP4-24. The FIA's investigation and resulting decision should be based entirely on observed facts... not on testimony from anyone that has anything to gain or lose based on the resulting decision. Otherwise you have to create an environment of fear to scare folks into telling the truth (which is exactly what the FIA is doing w/ threats of exclusion from the championship, and their big penalties, etc).

Second, this should have never happened because the stewards should have sorted it all out before pulling the SC in at the damn race!

I can't believe that NASCAR is so far ahead in this aspect. They have consistent rules for handling full course yellows and pace cars, and when they go green, there's no more discussion... the field is set, and it's set correctly 99.9% of the time. And even in that 0.1% of the time when they screw it up, it's up to the driver to make the pass to correct the situation... which may be unfair, but at least it's consistent and not up for further review a week after the damn race. With all the video cameras, GPS data, track loops, and track officials all over the place, there is NO excuse for getting this wrong. The stewards are flat out incompetent. :mad:

here we go again this time "liegate"

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...07182222.shtml

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...08172645.shtml

If the FIA decides to ban McLaren for any of the races, when they're already just barely able to put enough teams on grid to meet the 20 car minimum, they're idiots. In fact, they're already idiots for asking a team questions about their race strategy and expecting truthful answers. I can't blame McLaren at all for lying... they're trying to win a championship, and I don't remember seeing "telling the truth" as one of the technical regulations for F1.

The FIA never should have questioned McLaren. They should have just looked at the facts, including the radio transmissions where McLaren told Hamilton to let Trulli by, and then corrected the stewards' mistake that penalized Trulli. Hamilton should have placed 4th. And all this drama should have never happened.

This just reeks of the FIA making an example out of McLaren just to show FOTA who's boss in F1.

Win it or bin it!

Renault R28 crashed during Dubai Roadshow
Handheld Cam from above the pits:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiBvVCx-Yng

Highest Quality version I've found. Looks to be from the grandstands (fF to about 1:22 in):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJpURLp4wYI

Handheld cam from the pitlane wall (with an oh-shiiiii.. moment)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etWeu9_N9bg

The benefits of treaded tires and <18000 RPM engines comes to mind...

Interesting article on the McLaren factory.

I had no idea how much goes on at the actual factory during race weekend.

uh silly season 2010?

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headline...30140202.shtml

no tyre warmers or re-fueling.....wtf